Network 2002 – December 2001 Issue

Contents

World Trade Organisation Ministerial
Editorial
News
West Asia Regional Prep. Com.
Latin America & the Caribbean Regional Prep. Com.
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, COP 7
Implementation Conference
The Johannesburg Summit after September 11th
Putting Freshwater Supply and Sanitation on the Political Agenda
Diary Dates, Conferences & Events
What’s in Next Months Network 2002

Trade rules: 
It’s déjà vu all over again

  Ten years ago, the Earth Summit finished with a long laundry list of promises from governments. High on the list were reforms to make rules on the global economy fairer and more sustainable. But the promises were forgotten a year later when the same governments signed the Uruguay Round trade agreements. The aspirations of the Rio Principles, Agenda 21 and the Convention on Biological Diversity were trumped by enforceable rules on agriculture, services and intellectual property rights. 
  Ten years later, governments have set a new agenda for WTO negotiations. The outcome will provide a straightjacket for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg. Again, the principles of equity, social justice, and environmental sustainability are set to be relegated to the realms of rhetoric and exhortation. If WSSD is to make a difference, it must influence the outcomes of WTO negotiations. 
  After the Seattle debacle, developing countries and civil society groups went to the Doha Ministerial meeting last month with expectations of reform. The speeches of politicians have been positively dripping with the importance of making trade rules fairer and more sustainable. The reality was depressingly familiar. 
  The outcome resulted from four major failings in the trade system. Firstly, trade rules are deeply unfair to the poor. The World Bank calculates that rich countries’ tariffs on imports from the developing world are four times higher than tariffs on imports from other rich countries. One key reason is that the rich countries broke their promises made in the Uruguay Round. For example, agricultural subsidies in the rich countries have actually increased since 1994 and few textile quotas have been phased out. These broken promises are set to continue. In Doha, the aim of phasing out export subsidies for agriculture, responsible for wrecking farming systems and the lives of millions of rural communities in developing countries, was strongly resisted by the EU. Even though the Common Agriculture Policy is clearly unsustainable in the EU as well as to developing countries, the EU’s negotiator inserted a get-out clause at the last minute, to say that this aim is “without prejudging the outcome of negotiations.” The scene is set for more broken promises. 
  The second failing is that governments do not give priority to aims such as sustainable development in trade talks. The clear priority is to gain advantages for their companies. This strong influence of corporate lobbying was expressed eloquently by the former Director of the WTO’s Services Division, David Hartridge: “without the tremendous pressure generated by the American financial services sector, particularly companies like American Express and Citicorp, there would have been no services agreement”.  The General Agreement on Services (GATS) is one of the most important examples of the elevation of corporate rights above sustainable development. It aims to remove “barriers to trade”.  However, these barriers may be environmental laws or regulations to ensure that essential services such as water are affordable to the poor. GATS is developing a “necessity test” on whether domestic regulations are “necessary”. To date, ten out of eleven WTO cases have ruled in favour of unrestricted trade over public health or environmental restrictions.   
  Much is made of the voluntary commitments that countries make under GATS. But even though most countries have made commitments to open up tourism to foreign companies, few countries have reserved the rights to limit new development that threaten ecosystems, to impose conditions related to environmental impact or to require sharing of benefits with local communities. These core environmental principles could be prohibited as “unnecessary barriers to trade”. Moreover, when countries make commitments, it is for keeps. The WTO has described GATS as “effectively irreversible”. There has been no proper assessment of the impact of GATS on the poor and the environment, as called for in the agreement.
  The third failing is that efforts to deal with conflicts between trade and the environment are likely to result in even further undermining of environmental agreements. The apparent success in Doha to starting talks on the relationship between WTO rules and Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) includes a dangerous get-out clause: “the negotiations shall not prejudice the WTO rights of any member that is not a party to the MEA in question.” This provides an escape route for the US on the Kyoto Protocol and the Bio-safety Protocol. It also fails to give environmental and trade agreements equal status – the wording makes it clear that trade rules take precedence. Furthermore, it undermines future MEAs by ensuring that those who do not sign can ‘free ride’ on those who do. 
  The final failing is that the WTO remains a power-based system, unaccountable to most of its own members let alone to civil society. Despite calls in Seattle for “radical and fundamental reform” from Stephen Byers, then Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, the WTO’s process remains chaotic and deeply unfair to the poorer countries. Before Doha, a draft agenda was planned by exclusive group of countries, ignoring the proposals from developing countries. The powerful facilitators of informal groups were handpicked in Doha, all of them supporters of US and EU positions. They ran a process with no agenda, minutes or clear decision-making procedures. The rich nations compounded the injustice by using threats to aid budgets and trade preferences in negotiations. On the final night, twenty negotiators were kept in a room from 9 pm to 5 am. The resulting Declaration was given to other countries on a take-it or leave-it basis. Concerned about a second failure of the WTO, they had little choice but to acquiesce. This abuse of power by the rich nations to get their own way should never happen again.  
  These failings have become even more important as the WTO becomes the most powerful global body. In Doha, the EU took the negotiations to the brink of collapse in order to start negotiations on foreign investment and government procurement. Both cover economic activity greater than all of world trade. It was only after a courageous stand by India that the decision on whether to launch negotiations was delayed until the next Ministerial in late 2003. International rules on investment are urgently needed, but the liberalisation approach pushed by the EU is the wrong solution to the wrong problem in the wrong forum. 
  The shape of a relevant WSSD agenda begins to take shape.  Firstly, specific commitments by rich nations to make trade rules fairer to the poor, with no get-out clauses or loopholes.  Secondly, systematic reforms to WTO agreements so they promote sustainable development, not trade as an end in itself. Thirdly, a strengthened system of other international institutions to ensure that trade respects international environmental, development and human rights agreements. Fourthly, involving the UN system in enacting strong regulation of international companies to prevent monopolies, tax avoidance, unfair competition and abuse of power, and to ensure that companies abide by internationally agreed standards on the environment, core labour rights and human rights.  
  This is an ambitious agenda for WSSD. But the mounting crisis of increasing inequality, poverty, climate change, AIDS and instability demands a bold approach. We need the WSSD to aim high and start to address the most pressing problems of the global economy.
Barry Coates - Director of the World Development Movement
Barry@wdm.org.uk - www.wdm.org.uk

Editorial
  With just one regional preparatory meeting to go we are starting to get a clear picture of what the Earth Summit will be.  Despite each meeting to date adopting its own very unique form - the West Asia meeting lasted a staggering 4 hours - a reasonably consistent picture is emerging. The list includes poverty, debt, globalization, trade, various aspects of environmental degradation, financing of sustainable development., the WTO Ministerial Conference, with issues of security and conflict dominating the African and Arab Region meetings. 
  Although this list is perhaps unsurprising, from the perspective of recognising the 3 columns of sustainable development, the weight given to economic and social concerns are encouraging signs. However, cynics could counter that we’ve heard it all before. More reaffirmations, more recognition, more waffle. Fair point. For although floating in the air we may have heard increasing calls for ‘an action orientated agenda’, until the global preparations get under way, that’s all they are - floating in the air. Until substance is put on the bones, these affirmations will fall on unsympathetic developing country ears.
  Here the much talked about ‘Global Deal’ could play a pivotal role. Having said that though, no one seems to have extended any imagination about what such a deal could contain. This despite most regions having such a clear and cohesive idea of the agenda issues for the summit should be. Not that I would suggest for a moment that anyone is reluctant to commit to actually doing something. That, clearly, is the purpose of the global preparatory process. We wait and see.
  Ironically, outside of the official preparatory process, others are forging ahead. Recently we had the Reykjavik Fisheries conference, the WTO Ministerial and the continuation of the Kyoto Climate Negotiations. Over the next 2 months we have the UNESCO Oceans and Coastal Areas Conference, the International Freshwater Conference and the much prepared for Financing for Development Conference. What do these meetings have in common? All have featured to varying, but significant, degrees consideration of their impacts on Earth Summit 2002. Everyone, it seems, wants to play a part. 
  No doubt you have already read our WTO lead article which speaks for itself. Suffice to say, we have to find a balance of interests to make sustainable economic, social and environmental development viable.
    We round of this issue with a couple of contributions to the process of our own. First up is the introduction of our Implementation Conference. I won’t spoil the surprise here, but suffice to say, if you’re a stakeholder you will licking your lips in anticipation.  Next up is the summary to our recent online debate, hosted in partnership with the Heinrich Boell Foundation, concerning the impacts of the September 11th attacks on the Earth Summit. This one really helped focus minds on the true breadth and depth of multi-lateralism.        T. Middleton, Editor

News, News, News…
Oceans & Coasts at Earth Summit 2002
  It has been almost a decade since many important new agreements on oceans and coasts were adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit, including chapter 17 of Agenda 21, and the oceans-aspects of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Framework Convention on Climate Change. 
  Since that time, too, the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas has come into force, and several modifications to the convention - relating to Straddling Fish Stocks and to deep seabed mining - have been adopted. There has been much investment in the management of coastal and marine areas by national and international donors.
  The Global Conference on Oceans and Coasts at Rio+10, to be held at UNESCO headquarters in Paris on December 3-7th, is intended to provide an overall assessment of progress achieved on oceans and coasts since the Earth Summit. The Conference will also provide input to the discussions by governments which will take place at Earth Summit 2002.
  Specifically the Conference will: 
•	Provide an assessment of progress achieved in all aspects of the post-Earth Summit agenda on Oceans & Coasts;
•	Identify continuing, persisting challenges that need to be addressed with renewed commitment;
•	Identify new challenges that are arising and need to be addressed;
•	Examine cross-cutting issues among various ocean and coastal sectors;
•	Consider options for concerted action on outstanding cross-sectoral issues;
•	Provide input to the oceans and coasts agenda of Earth Summit 2002.
  Drawing from recent related meetings, the Conference agenda is divided into a series of Panel Sessions  addressing issues including: Implementing international agreements and their harmonisation; Donor investments in oceans and coasts; Results of major oceans research programmes; Biodiversity, critical habitats and species at risk; Integrated coastal management; Fisheries and aquaculture; Marine protected areas; Improvements in global and regional ocean governance. 
  There will also 9 Working Groups running parallel to the Panel Sessions to assess the information presented at the Conference. Their work will feed into the Conference’s outputs.  
  The Conference has 2 major planned outputs: The publication of a Conference Findings Volume that will summarise the findings and recommendations for each major Conference topic, which will be distributed to all government delegations involved in Earth Summit 2002; the other is the publication of a book associated to special issues in several international journals bringing together various clusters of papers and commentaries presented at the Conference. 
  More information is available online at: 
www.udel.edu/CMS/csmp/rio+10/

International Conference on Freshwater
  The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is to host the International Conference on Freshwater. The conference will take place from 3-7 December in Bonn, Germany.
  The Conference aims to build on the freshwater-related objectives identified in chapter 18 of Agenda 21. The urgent need for action in the area of freshwater has been emphasised in the UN Millennium Declaration, adopted by the UN Millennium Assembly, September 2000. The Millennium Assembly set out one of the targets for poverty alleviation as follows:
  ‘We resolve...to halve, by the year 2015...the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water’.
  And further, as a first step: ‘to stop the unsustainable exploitation of water resources by developing water management strategies at the regional, national and local levels, which promote both equitable access and adequate supplies’.
  The Conference serves as a preparatory step on freshwater issues for the upcoming Earth Summit 2002. The main objective of the Conference is to develop recommendations for the Summit on water and sustainable development issues. Building on the progress achieved in the implementation of Agenda 21, the Conference will identify remaining obstacles and define necessary actions.
  The Conference further aims to contribute to the fulfilment of the water related International Development Target established by the UN Millennium Assembly.
  A key consideration will be how to combat negative effects of the water crises on people’s livelihood. Emphasis is put on recommendations which show the way forward to implementation and necessary action to overcome the water crises.
  The Conference is structured into Ministerial Sessions, followed by Working Groups then Plenary Sessions before the Conference is drawn to a conclusion. The Ministerial Sessions are titled ‘Equitable and sustainable use of freshwater resources’ and ‘Mobilising financial resources for infrastructure investment’. The Working Groups will follow this with more focussed discussion on governance, finance, capacity building and technology transfer.
  The Conference will result in action orientated recommendations regarding political and forward-looking measures to improve and facilitate implementation of agreed goals and programmes in the water-related fields of sustainable development. These recommendations will be captured in a document which is expected to be the main substantive outcome of the Conference. A draft of these recommendations will be made available to Conference participants in advance.
  During the first 2 days of the Conference there will be 2 a Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue sessions. These will seek Stakeholder perspectives on ’Equitable access to and sustainable supply of freshwater resources for the poor’ and ’Developing strategies for sustainable and equitable management of freshwater resources’.  
  Other outcomes of the Conference will include the report of the Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue (see the November issue of Network 2002). Also reports of the Working Group Sessions will be included in the Conference report.
  
Regional
Preparatory 
Conferences for 
Earth Summit 2002

West Asia Regional Prep. Comm.
Written by Earth Negotiations Bulletin, Vol. 22 No. 07
Monday, 29 October 2001
  The West Asia (Arab Region) Preparatory Committee meeting (PrepCom) takes the record for the shortest of the four regional meetings to date. Initially planned for two days, and later rescheduled to two half-day sessions, the PrepCom concluded in under four hours. The opening ceremony suddenly turned into a closing plenary following the Chair’s announcement that business was finished and he would close the PrepCom. Confusion ensued as representatives of regional and intergovernmental organizations scrambled for the floor to make their statements, scheduled for delivery the following day. Some dignitaries were still in transit and thus did not make it to the PrepCom at all.
  As in the other regional preparations, the Arab Region PrepCom lacked synchronization between the international, national and regional preparatory processes. At the opening of the PrepCom only 3 of the Arab Region’s 22 countries had concluded their national reports. Fewer still were able to provide feedback on the documents circulated before the 21-22 Oct. Joint Committee on Environment and Development in the Arab Region 
(JCEDAR) meeting, calling into question the effectiveness of the "bottom-up" approach that the exercise was intended to achieve. However, as the PrepCom outputs are to be circulated to members for comment, national-level efforts could still determine the effectiveness of the process. The challenge for efforts at the national level extends to other aspects of the process. 
  Institutional memory is an important ingredient in any negotiating process. Whereas participants at the Cairo meeting were mainly drawn from capitals with little apparent participation or feedback from UN missions, the Arab Region’s representatives to the UN in New York are likely to drive the Region’s input when the WSSD agenda is negotiated at PrepCom II. Also, the 8 representatives from North Africa at the Cairo meeting were different from those who attended the African Prep Com in Nairobi. The level of coordination and communication required to ensure harmonization within country positions, let alone in interregional negotiations, may be difficult to resolve and, in the long run, affect implementation of the Johannesburg outputs. With 1 regional preparatory meeting – the East Asia and the Pacific Region in late November – to go before WSSD PrepCom II, the challenges ahead and potential areas for convergence are beginning to emerge.
  Recurring themes in Europe, Africa, Latin America and the Arab Region include poverty, debt, globalization, trade, various aspects of environmental degradation and financing of sustainable development. Participants at all but the Latin America and Caribbean Regional meetings referred to the recent WTO Ministerial Conference, and issues of security and conflict dominated the African and Arab Region meetings. These convergences suggest prima facie that the identification of themes for the Summit may not be too daunting a task, although many challenges remain on the road to Johannesburg. 
  One of these challenges is how closely PrepCom II will draw on the regional outputs to identify themes. Unlike the European and North American preparations, many of the developing region participants were national rather than New York-based delegates, who will also likely follow the process. Given that the developing regions’ preparations will feed into the G-77/China negotiation process, perhaps the Arab Region approach of preparing an Address of "talking points" for their members to emphasize may prove the most valuable asset from the regional preparations.
  Developing country emphasis that the Johannesburg Summit is about sustainable development, a leap from the Rio legacy of environment and development, has emerged loud and clear during the preparations to date. Yet, the lack of integration – or deliberate marginalization of the economic and social pillars in the regional meetings – suggests the need first to resolve this sectoral compartmentalization at the national level in order to achieve implementable Johannesburg outputs. However the WSSD agenda is eventually frosted, the divergent opinions emerging from regional preparations, while providing some of the necessary ingredients, offer a taste of the challenge to come in New York when delegates attempt to reach agreement on anything but the broadest of goals.

Latin American Regional Prep. Comm. 
By Liliana Hisas, Fundación Ecológica Universal (Argentina) 
  The Latin American and Caribbean Regional Preparatory Conference for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) took place at the historic Rio Centro (same location as the 1992 Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 23-24 October. 
  The need for a sustainable globalization, on the one hand, and partial civil society involvement, on the other, were some of the key outcomes. 
Meeting of Civil Society Networks
  A Meeting of Latin American and Caribbean Civil Society Networks was held convened as a preparation to the official meeting, held from 18-20 October. Some 60 representatives from civil society networks and organizations attended. The issues discussed included: the regional context towards the WSSD, biodiversity, forests, climate change, globalization and trade, financing and vulnerability. Some of the key issues emerged from the civil society discussions were: economic globalization, as a main factor for environmental degradation; the need for a participatory democracy, in order to achieve sustainable development; poverty and lack of equity, as an indicator of social unsustainability. Two documents were produced, based on these discussions: 
1.	Declaration of the Regional Networks, which was read during the official meeting, after the official Plan of Action was agreed by governments; 
2.	Platform for Action, which sets the guidelines for Latin American civil society into the WSSD process. This document is still open for input and comments, as all participants committed to circulate it to its Networks;  
  There was little interconnection between the official draft of the Platform for Action and the civil society documents, as non-governmental actors were not involved in the official drafting process. 
  Most of the civil society representatives that attended this meeting, were not present during the PrepCom, as they were only invited by UNEP to participate of the Civil Society meeting. 
Platform for Action
  Delegates from Latin America and the Caribbean adopted the "Rio de Janeiro Platform for Action on the Road to Johannesburg 2002".  The Platform consists of four sections on: 1) reaffirmation of principles and commitments; 2) obstacles and lessons learned; 3) present considerations; and 4) future commitments.
1) Reaffirmation of principles and commitments: recalls the commitments at UNCED, as well as the Rio Conventions and subsequent legal instruments. 
2) Obstacles and lessons learned: 
·	Considers the WSSD an opportunity to evaluate progress since UNCED, noting deteriorating trends;
·	Believes that developments related to democracy and peace have helped incorporate environment into development processes and make people-centered sustainable development a priority;
·	Recognizes the importance of civil society participation;
·	Emphasizes that unsustainable production and consumption patterns and some trade and financial mechanisms in developed countries jeopardize the achievement of sustainable development;
·	Regrets the lack of measures to ensure technology transfer from developed countries;
·	Recognizes the need for a stable, predictable, open and inclusive international economic system;
·	Rejects policies that distort international trade, and urges the elimination of export subsidies and improved market access;
·	Expresses concern regarding possible environmental conditionality and an abusive interpretation of the precautionary principle;
·	Renews commitment to the GEF and other multilateral finance agencies. 
3) Present considerations: includes paragraphs on international cooperation to improve the living conditions of present and future generations, on efforts to reinforce sub-regional and regional cooperation and meet the needs of the most vulnerable, and on making globalization sustainable. 
4) Future commitments: includes three subsections on: 
a)	The institutional structure for sustainable development, formulating the commitment to develop local, national and regional capacities, to strengthen institutions to promote integration of environmental, social and economic policies,
b)	Financing and technology transfer:  
·	Stresses the need for a sufficient and predictable level of new and additional resources for the implementation of Agenda 21;
·	Reiterates the 0.7% of GNP for ODA target for developed countries;
·	Calls for support to the GEF;
·	Recognizes the burden of debt and debt-servicing and underscores the need for debt relief for highly-indebted developing countries;
·	Recommends that the Financing for Development conference address financing for national public goods with global benefits;
c)	Formulation of action: 
·	Calls for universal ratification of the CBD, equitable access to the benefits afforded by the use of genetic resources, protection of traditional knowledge and the entry into force of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety before the WSSD;
·	Underscores the importance of assessing vulnerability and defining indicators in this regard, reducing vulnerability to natural disasters, and recognizing the vulnerability of SIDS;
·	Promotes integrated water resource management and international cooperation schemes for water management;
·	Supports international cooperation for sustainable forest management;
·	Underscores the need to diversify the energy supply and foster energy efficiency;
·	Calls for the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by the WSSD, and for climate change adaptation programmes;
·	Calls for the ratification of the chemicals conventions, and underscores the links between environment and health;
·	Stresses the need for effective urban planning and land management, recognition of the relationship between population and the environment; 
·	Suggests the cross-sectoral issues of finance, science and technology, capacity building and vulnerability as agenda items for the WSSD, and, as its central theme, "Towards a new globalization that ensures equitable, inclusive and sustainable development." 
Outcomes and challenges for Latin American and the Caribbean 
  Some nine years after the Earth Summit, the dynamics between civil society and government in Latin America and the Caribbean has not changed much. Only for the exception of a few governments which included civil society representatives in their delegations (Nicaragua, Colombia and Venezuela), the dialogue and interaction among governmental and non-governmental actors is still limited, and in some cases even difficult. This situation certainly poses one of the main challenges for civil society. 
  As for the outcomes of the Plan of Action proposed by governments, it focuses primarily on the economic situation of the region, highlighting themes such as the debt crisis, debt-for-environment swaps and biodiversity, financing for sustainable development and the concept of a new, more sustainable globalization –a key concept to be presented and discussed at PrepCom II. 
  On the civil society side, the burden is even greater. As key actors in the sustainable development equation, the challenges include: 
1.	To strengthen the role of civil society regarding effective involvement in sustainable development decision-making process, dissemination of information and awareness raising. 
2.	To promote local, national and regional capacity building, increasing consensus mechanisms between governments and civil society. 
3.	To promote flexible and adequate mechanisms to address sustainable development in multilateral forums. 

Climate agreement now ready for Earth Summit 2002

  Following on the heels of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s 6th Session meeting (COP 6) in July this year, governments reconvened their discussions in Morocco from October 29th to November 9th. Dealing with the teeth behind the Kyoto Protocol the meeting was charged with making the Climate Change process work. Matthias Duwe, Climate Network Europe, reports.
  In stark contrast to the enormous coverage that the UN climate talks had received in July at COP 6, this time the world’s media only started taking notice when the deal was finally done. Following a three-day showdown at ministerial level, the early morning of November 10th saw a successful end of the latest round of international talks on climate change in Marrakech, Morocco. The good news first: the seemingly endless wrangling over the details of the Kyoto Protocol is over. The text is agreed and the last formal obstacle in the path of its ratification gone. Government delegations and observers welcomed the compromise, despite environmentally harmful concessions wrung out of the process by major developed countries.
  The Marrakech Accords, some 250 pages long, clarify nearly all of the questions left unresolved when the Kyoto Protocol was adopted four years ago. While it will take time to assess the consequences arising from the text to their full extent, here is a brief initial account of the trouble spots during the November talks. Most problematic was the disruptive behavior of a group of four countries: Australia, Canada, Japan and Russia. While the Australians are still reluctant to declare their full participation after the US pulled out of the treaty earlier this year, Canada was mainly after even more leeway in achieving its emission reduction target. Japan and Russia had the most powerful cards to play, as the American withdrawal has made their consent indispensable for the treaty’s entry into force.
  One of the most contentious issues was the character of the mechanism that will ensure a country’s compliance with its treaty obligations. Japan won its way in postponing a decision on whether consequences will be legally or just politically binding. However, Parties settled on a formulation which integrates the compliance section into the Accords instead of requiring a separate agreement, thus making it part of the overall package.
  The criteria that will allow developed countries to participate in the Protocol’s so-called flexibility mechanisms also presented opportunity for serious rows. Japan again sought to ease the rules in order to ensure eligibility by Russia from which it hopes to buy excess emission permits. The clause which limits such trading initially to ten percent of a country’s allowances was also challenged, but remained in the text. 
  How credits from climate projects and trading would be dealt with in the crucial accounting bit of the Kyoto rules was another difficult agenda item. Accounting for credits acquired from domestic forests, which qualify as carbon sinks, was particularly controversial. The European Union, along with developing countries lost most of their demands to limit the extent to which such credits could be exchanged for another or even be saved for future commitment periods. Worse still, a phrase included in the Accords that bans the “banking” of forest credits will probably be easily circumvented through clever accounting. 
  The political agreement struck in Bonn in July, which provided the basis for the Marrakech conference, stipulates the maximum amount of such sink credits which a country is allowed to count towards its target. Still, the arguably rather generous figures it was allotted was not enough for Russia, which felt sidelined in the negotiations, despite the importance of its ratification. Therefore, they asked for and in the end received agreement by other countries to a doubling of its sinks capacity. Yet, the extra tons won’t alter the balance significantly, as Russia already has plenty of emission credits at its disposal due to economic decline.
  Crucial for sound implementation of the treaty are transparency and public participation. Access to information has been limited in some sections (such as compliance) under the cover of confidentiality. Moreover, the provisions for stakeholder involvement under the project-based mechanisms of the Protocol fall short of international standard practice of other institutions including the World Bank. Non-governmental organizations have already declared their intention to monitor these developments closely. They announced the establishment of a new initiative called CDMwatch (Clean Development Mechanism), even before the mechanism became reality with the first meeting of its newly appointed Executive Board right after the negotiations had ended.
  The conference closed on the note that it was time to move ahead. Much attention was focused on the Earth Summit in Johannesburg. Along with the climate accords ministers adopted a political declaration heralded as the official input of the Kyoto talks to the 2002 summit. Unfortunately, the tone of this document remained vague and lacked the progressive demands fought for by NGOs in particular. Still, the Earth Summit may become a major milestone for the evolution of the climate regime. Developed country governments led by the EU have declared repeatedly their will to have the Kyoto Protocol enter into force by the Johannesburg meeting. Reactions from Japan and Russia indicate that the renewed concessions have finally won their much needed ratification. After all the talk, now is the time to turn words into action. The last decade may seem like lost time towards more sustainability. One fool-proof way that governments can give the account of the ten years since Rio a positive start is to present Johannesburg with a climate treaty that is finally up and running.
  For more information contact: www.unfccc.int

Matthias Duwe, Climate Network Europe (CNE), mduwe@gmx.net

Implementation Conference
Stakeholder Action for Our Common Future
  Preparations are well underway for this event, which UNED Forum is planning to facilitate in Johannesburg in August 2002. It is intended to bring together leading representatives of the Agenda 21 Major Groups to work on 5 key issues and to agree action plans for each one. The objective is to show how stakeholders, working in partnership, can help implement the Sustainable Development Agreements.
  The IC will be focusing on those areas where stakeholders need to play key roles and take responsibilities for action and change. More specifically, it will focus on those areas where collaborative stakeholder action offers the best strategies for sustainable development.
  UNED Forum has conducted a consultation process with its International Advisory Board members from June to August 2001, and the following five issues have been agreed: 
·	Freshwater;
·	Renewable Energy;
·	Food Security;
·	Public Health and HIV/AIDS; and
·	Tools for Corporate Citizenship (which is developing into "stakeholder responsibility").
  Under these broad issues, specific focus areas for joint action will be identified through consultations. All will be addressed with a particular focus on:	social inclusion and poverty eradication; governance;	the impacts of globalisation; and gender.
  Work on these issues affects a multitude of stakeholders, can build on previous stakeholder dialogues, and benefit from the involvement of an active, enthusiastic core of leading stakeholder representatives. 
  The IC is not just a conference – it is a process of collaboration that is quickly picking up speed, and will continue after Johannesburg when action plans will be put into practice and monitored, replications of successful activities will be sought, and larger networks will be built. 
  It is important to understand that as the facilitator of the process, UNED Forum is creating a space for participants to fill: to shape the agenda and the process itself. The design of the IC process is based on UNED Forum's work on multi-stakeholder processes over recent years and the practical guidelines we have developed (www.earthsummit2002.org/msp). The guiding lines for the  IC endeavour are the key principles of stakeholder collaboration, such as: effectiveness; equity; flexibility; inclusiveness; learning; transparency; partnership and collaboration.
  Each conference issue has its own preparatory process, which is handled by the Project Coordinators and Issue Coordinators at UNED Forum; international multi-stakeholder Issue Advisory Groups with equitable representation of relevant stakeholder groups; Issue Authors to provide background documents and keep track of developments, and professional Facilitators from around the globe.
  We are building on existing good practice and partnership models, drawing upon the rich expertise and experience gained by stakeholders in recent years. We also aim to organise pre-meetings, eg around the upcoming global PrepComms and in South Africa. A key idea is to make the preparatory process as direct and interactive as possible: meetings, phone conversations, telephone conferences, CD ROMs with audio and video – rather than 'piles' of documents to be produced and commented on. We are aiming to create a space of creativity and collaboration, of enjoyable interaction aiming to find the common ground without brushing over differences, and allowing everybody to express their ideas and needs in an open, appreciated manner.
  All of the desired outcomes will have the form of Action Plans: Who? What? When? How? Financed how? Facilitated by whom?
  Outcomes will depend on how far the process of dialogue and identifying joint action has come by the time of the IC itself. This in turn depends on the issues addressed, and on the relationships between stakeholders. Therefore, desired outcomes can include:
·	Agreements on continuous dialogue between stakeholders;
·	Agreements on stakeholders engaging with governments and intergovernmental bodies;
·	Agreed work programmes to develop concrete projects;
·	Agreed concrete projects.
  Some of the actions that emerge through the preparatory process may be actions to which many stakeholders will want to agree. Others may be action plans that only 2 or 3 organisations or networks will want to pursue. The process is open for both kinds of outcomes, and those in between.
We will also work with a group of people to advise on financing models for potential outcomes so that at the IC there are ideas on how to resource action plans that stakeholders agree.
  The IC does not aim to develop stakeholder position papers aiming to impact the Summit outcome documents. However, comprehensive stakeholder thinking will be developed on the 5 IC issues and we will make these available to the Summit process throughout the preparations. We also aim to present the IC outcomes at a side event and exhibition at the Summit itself. This will be a strong message of stakeholders taking their responsibility, supporting the international agreements through their demonstrated actions and powers. 
  We hope that such action-oriented messages will support the  spirit of the Summit process and help to make it a success with a strong legacy, benefiting those who are most in need.
  UNED Forum is seeking to work with partner organisations on the IC as a whole or individual issue strands. We are engaged in discussions with stakeholder networks and organisations; intergovernmental bodies, and governments. Such partners will input into the process and the issue developments.
  If you are interesting in becoming involved in this exciting process, please contact us. You will find further information and a downloadable brochure at www.earthsummit2002.org/ic. 
Minu Hemmati, minush@aol.com, and Robert Whitfield, rwhitfield@earthsummit2002.org

The Road to 
Johannesburg 
after Sept 11th

  The Heinrich Boell Foundation and UNED Forum joined forces to create a space for a global debate on the impact of the September 11 attacks and subsequent war on the Earth Summit 2002 process. The online debate was held November 19-24 with more than 400 subscribers from all over the globe participating in this forum. Jasmin Enayati, who facilitated the debate reports.
  "One is tempted to say that we must now focus all our energies on the struggle against terrorism, and on directly related issues. Yet if we should do so, we will be giving the terrorists a victory of a kind. Let us remember that none of the issues that faced us on 10 September has become less urgent. The number of people living on less than one dollar a day has not decreased. The numbers dying of HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and other preventable diseases have not decreased. The factors that cause the desert to advance, biodiversity to be lost, and the Earth's atmosphere to warm have not decreased." 
  UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the UN General Assembly on November 10.
  The terrorist attacks of September 11 seem to have changed world politics dramatically. New and unexpected alliances are forged, the priorities of governments are reassessed, public attention is focused on the threat of terrorism. There was a wide range of opinions as to whether we are experiencing a new climate of international co-operation between nations after September 11. Some believe that the terrorist attacks will eventually lead to enhanced cooperation and a stronger commitment by the US to multi-lateralism which would provide a fertile ground for a "global deal" between North and South, based on genuine collaboration between all stakeholders. The attacks of September 11 cannot in itself be the source or the catalyst for more cooperation, they only heighten the urgency for cooperation which has been in the making since the end of the Cold War. The agenda of the Johannesburg Summit will have to reflect the new realities after September 11 and put more emphasis on poverty eradication and social equity: 
  "We have to reach beyond easy rhetoric like "poverty reduction", and "development," and talk instead about "inequality," and the need for the global redistribution of wealth as the precondition of any real turn towards sustainability culture."
  The hope was expressed that September 11 may drive people to rethink the concept of economic liberalisation and the global free market. Many commentators agreed that the Johannesburg Summit must provide a platform by which we intensify our focus on governance structures, social development and global economic disparities. In this regard, the Financing for Development Conference that will take place in March next year will be of utmost importance for the Johannesburg Summit. Another promising sign is the recent agreement to launch a new World Trade Organisation (WTO) Round. Trade needs to be made fairer and freer and we need to ensure access for developing country products to OECD markets, while respecting the environment. However, another issue under discussion were the consequences of a weakened European Union that is falling back on the foreign policy of nation states and which will not be in a position to show the strength for confronting unilateral US environmental policies. 
  Governments have to show the political will and invest the necessary political capital to turn the Johannesburg Summit into a success. In this regard, the climate change negotiations are critical and ratification of the Kyoto Protocol before the Summit would be crucial. 
  Considering the role the UN was playing after September 11, it was found imperative that the UN be properly resourced, genuinely representative, have sufficient authority and be efficiently run to act on the world stage when needed. It is the mandate of the world community to establish a global rule of law. The role of NGOs has also been affected: the challenge for NGOs lies in creating and promoting a vision effectively without alienating public support. This also means that all stakeholders need to be engaged in the process. As one commentator puts it,
  "there is a need to show what violates democratic practice based on universal truths and the rationality of the mind to decide according to such criteria that are just to mankind. For the changes ahead there are needed such measures that can mediate between the needs for sustainable development and what is possible in the given situation, including the institutional arrangements of United Nations, WTO, national governments, European Union, etc. Any development will lead to violence if people abhor non violent ways of resolving conflicts."
  One commentator raised the concern that the losses of political accountability due to the justification of being at war against terrorism will make transparency of governmental procedures almost impossible. Another concern was that an intensified religious divide will lead to a setback in development in Islamic countries. It was suggested that the Summit should change its emphasis profoundly to deal primarily with issues of social and economic development in all Third World and Islamic countries. As one contributor suggests, peace has to be considered as the primary focus at environmental and social for a around the world including the Johannesburg Summit, with the anniversary of September 11 being an ideal time to promote the message through the mass media.
  Think-pieces and contributions can be accessed at www.worldsummit2002.org
  Jasmin Enayati - UNED Forum Email: jenayati@earthsummit2002.org

Putting Water & Sanitation on the Political Agenda
International Conference on 
Freshwater
Side event: Roundtable Panel and Public Debate
Bonn, Germany
3 December 2001, 14h00 – 17h00
Invited panelists:
•	His Royal Highness the Prince of Orange
•	Mr. Ronnie Kasrils, Minister for Water and Forestry,  South Africa
•	Mr. Macky Sall, Minister for Mines, Energy and Hydrology, Senegal
•	Mr. Venkiya Naidu, Federal Minister for Rural Development and Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, India,
•	Ms. Carmina Moreno, Director General de Agua Potable, Colombia
•	Mr. Jan Pronk , Minister for Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment,  The Netherlands
•	Mr. Michael Meacher, Minister for the Environment, United Kingdom, 
•	Mr.Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary General for Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, New York
•	Dr. Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director, UNEP, Nairobi 
•	Ms. Margaret Catley-Carlson, Chairperson, Global Water Partnership, Stockholm
•	Mr. Gerard Payen, CEO of ONDEO, Paris
•	Sir Richard Jolly, Chairman, Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council, Geneva  ( facilitator)
Summary: 
  According to the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council and the Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment Report 2000 published jointly with WHO and UNICEF, today there are still over a billion people without access to an acceptable supply of drinking water and some 2.4 billion without hygienic means of sanitation. The poor pay a terrible price for their poverty: squalor, disease and death in and around cities in the developing world are daily reminders of the societal divide that condemns more and more people to a marginal and undignified existence. 
  Why do politicians, the media, civic leaders and other opinion-makers in society stand by while some 6,000 people die every day from diarrhoeal disease?  Why do nations continue to pay the heavy price in health care, lost productivity and environmental degradation, rather than opt for the less costly alternative of improving health and hygiene through sustainable water and sanitation services?
  Can “people-centred approaches” bring about a sanitation revolution and transform the lives of billions of people in a generation?  Growing numbers of individuals are confident that such a revolution is indeed and indeed possible.  Vision 21 – Water for People – is an initiative that was launched by the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council during the Second World Water Forum and Ministerial Conference in The Hague in March 2000.   The panel will discuss how people-centred strategies can help solve the global water and sanitation crises.  They will raise critical issues to the top of the political agenda and will address the lack of an international development target for sanitation that was overlooked by the Millennium Summit Declaration  2000, so that world leaders and their citizens can make improvements in the lives of the billions of unserved poor.  They will discuss needed changes in attitudes and behaviour, policy and practices of those working in the water and sanitation sector as well as in related sectors of health, environment, education, nutrition, poverty alleviation and human rights, that will be needed to bring about institutional and legislative reforms.   
  The event will be open to all participants of the Conference and to media representatives.  The Council’s Regional and National co-ordinators will also be present to share their experiences from the ground. 
  A Video News Release on people-centred approaches featuring urban and rural examples will be screened to help focus the discussions.   A question-and-answer portion will involve the audience and panelists in a real dialogue in the quest for practical solutions and exchange of ideas and experiences.
  The outcome of the discussions will be presented to the Ministerial part of the Conference (4-5 December 2001.) and conveyed to the World Summit for Sustainable Development to be held in Johannesburg, South Africa in September 2002.  
  For more information on this event, please contact: Mr. Gourisankar Ghosh, Executive Director, WSSCC, c/o WHO, 20 avenue Appia, CH 1211 – Geneva 27, Switzerland. 
 Tel: +41 22 7913517; Fax:+ 41 22 791 4847; 
E-mail: ghoshg@who.ch
Or: Ms. Eirah Gorre-Dale, Advocacy and Media Adviser, WSSCC, in New York, c/o UN OPS-ENVP Room GWP-5128, 405 Lexington Avenue, New York,  N.Y. 10017, U.S.A.  Tel: +1 212 457-1862; Fax: +1 212 457 4044; 
E-mail: EirahGD@unops.org    Web : www.wsscc.org

Diary Dates, Events & Conferences

1 December	Intergovernmental Group of Ministers on International Governance. Berlin, Germany. 
Contact: www.unep.org/IEG	
3-4 December	GEF Replenishment Meetings. Edinburgh, Scotland. 
Contact: www.gefweb.org/Replenishment/Schedule_of_Meetings/schedule_of_meetings.html	
3-7 December	International Conference on Freshwater. Bonn, Germany. Contact: www.water-2001.de	
3-7 December	International Conference on Oceans & Coasts at Rio+10 - Assessing progress, addressing continuing and new challenges. Paris, France. Contact: www.udel.edu/CMS/csmp/rio+10/	
6-7 December	Global Environment Facility Council Meeting. Washington DC, USA. 
Contact: www.gefweb.org	
11 December	UN Official launch of the International Year of  Mountains 2002. New York, USA. 
Contact www.mountain.org	
6-11 January	Rio 02 - World Climate & Energy Event. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 
Contact: www.rio02.de	
14-25 January	Financing for Development Final Prep. Comm.. New York, USA.
Contact: ffd@un.org	
29 Jan. - 8 Feb.	World Summit on Sustainable Development Prep. Comm. II. New York, USA. 
Contact: www.johannesburgsummit.org/web_pages/second_prepcom.htm	
February	2nd Meeting on the UNCCD Panel of Eminent Personalities in Preparation for the WSSD. Niger. Contact: www.unccd.int	
9-11 February	Delhi Sustainable Development Summit 2002. New Delhi, India. 
Contact: www.teriin.org/dsds/index.htm	
20-22 February	Local Government International Prep. Comm. Meeting. North Vancouver, Canada. 
Contact:  www.iclei.org/johannesburg2002	
4-15 March	2nd Session of the UN Forum on Forests. San José, Costa Rica. 
Contact: www.un.org/esa/sustdev/forests.htm	
18-22 March	International Conference on Financing for Development. Monterrey, Mexico. 
Contact: www.un.org/esa/ffd	

What’s in next months Network ~2002…

•	Earth Summit 2002 Prep. Comm. II - Preview
•	International Freshwater Conference - Outcomes & Analysis
•	Financing for Development Prep. Com. - Preview
•	Global Environment Facility Council Meetings - Outcomes & Analysis
•	International Conference on Oceans & Coasts at Rio+10 - Outcomes & Analysis
•